Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/523

 TS EE TIBURCIO PAKROTT. 515 �Otto. 573. These cases hold that the power of taxation, and power to require licenses, are legitimate powers, to be exer- cised without discrimination; but they are unlawful and unconstitutional 'when used to discriminate against foreign goods or manufacturera of other states. That is to say, they are constitutional and lawful when used for a constitutional and lawful purpose, but unlawful, and in violation of the con- stitution, when used to attain an unlawful or unconstitutional end. And whatever form the law may take on, or in what- ever language be couehed, the court will strip off its disguise, and judge of the purpose from the manifest intent as indi- cated by the efFect. �In Cummings v. Missouri, Mr. Justice Field, in speaking for the court, says: "The difference between the last case sup- posed and the case as actually presented is one of form only, and not substance. * • • Ti^e deprivation is effected with equal certain ty in the one case as it would be in th'e other, but not with equal directness. The -purpose of the lawmaker, in the case supposed, would be openly avowed; in the case existing, it is only disguised. The legal resuit must be the same ; for what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The constitution deals with substance, not shadows. Its inhibition was leveled at the thing, not the name. It intended that the rights of the citizen should be secure against deprivation for past conduct by legislative enactment under any form, however disguised. If the inhi- bition can be evaded by the form of the enactment, its inser- tion in the fundamental law was a vain and futile proceed- ing." 4 Wall. 325. See, alao, Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 2 Otto, 268; Chy Lung v.Freeman, là. 279; R. Co. v. Husen, 5 Otto, 472. �In Doyle v. Continental Insurance Co. 4 Otto, 535, most con- fidently relied on by the respondent, the end to be accom- plished — the exclusion of a foreign corporation from doing business in the state except upon conditions prescribed by the state — was lawful, and the means adopted lawful. There were no rights secured by treaty or the national constitution violated. The state and the foreign corporation were the ��� �